Draft Environmental Impact Statement/, 42094-42095 [05-14354]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
• National Park Service

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 139 (Thursday, July 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42094-42095]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-14354]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Draft Environmental Impact Statement[bs]General 
Management Plan, Minidoka Internment National Monument, Jerome County, 
ID; Notice of Availability

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended), and the Council on Environmental 
Quality Regulations (40 CFR part 1500-1508), the National Park Service, 
Department of the Interior, has prepared a draft general management 
plan (GMP) and environmental impact statement (DEIS) for Minidoka 
Internment National Monument located in Jerome County, Idaho. In 
addition to a ``no-action'' alternative (which would maintain current 
management), the DEIS describes and analyzes three ``action'' 
alternatives which respond to the concerns and issues of the public 
identified during the extensive scoping process, as well as 
conservation planning requirements. These alternatives present varying 
management strategies for resource protection and preservation, 
education and interpretation, visitor use and facilities, land 
protection and boundaries, and long-term operations and management of 
the national monument. The potential environmental consequences of all 
the alternatives, and mitigation strategies, are identified and 
analyzed; a determination as to the ``environmentally preferred'' 
alternative is also provided in the DEIS.
    Scoping: A Notice of Intent announcing preparation of the DEIS and 
general management plan was published in the Federal Register on April 
24, 2002. Extensive public involvement was deemed necessary for the 
success of this planning project, given the nature and sensitivity of 
the national monument's history, the speed in which the national 
monument was established, as well as the national monument's remote 
location. Public engagement and information measures have included 
public meetings and workshops, presentations and meetings with 
interested stakeholders, briefings with the Congressional delegation 
and State and Jerome county officials, newsletter mailings, local and 
regional and press releases, and Web site postings.
    Preceding the formal GMP planning process, National Park Service 
(NPS) staff conducted informational meetings about the national 
monument with Japanese American organizations, community organizations, 
various governmental entities, potential stakeholder groups, and 
individuals during the spring, summer and early fall of 2002. 
Approximately 50 meetings were held in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and 
Alaska during this time, and approximately 2,000 people were contacted. 
The purpose of these initial meetings was to help characterize the 
scale and extent of the planning process.
    Thus far the NPS has encouraged the public to provide relevant 
information, issues and concerns during two formal public planning 
stages. The first stage, called Scoping, was intended to elicit issues, 
concerns, and suggestions to be addressed during the planning process. 
Nine public workshops were held in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon in 
November 2002; per Federal Register announcement dated November 19, 
2002 the scoping period was extended an additional 30 days through 
December 31, 2002. Overall 250 people provided comments in workshops, 
and another 225 people provided written comments. The second stage, 
called Draft Alternatives, was intended to present the public with 
preliminary draft alternatives and invite comments on these 
alternatives. These draft alternatives were developed to address the 
specific issues and concerns that were raised by the public during the 
Scoping phase. Eleven public workshops were held in Idaho, Washington, 
and Oregon in July and August 2003 (215 people provided oral comments 
in the workshops, and another 50 people provided written comments).
    Proposed Plan and Alternatives: Alternative A is the ``no-action'' 
alternative and would continue current management practices. This 
alternative would provide general management guidance for incremental 
and minimal changes in park operations, staffing, visitor services, and 
facilities to accommodate visitors. While the historic resources of the 
site would continue to be protected, only minor additional site work 
would be anticipated under this alternative. The ``no-action'' 
alternative is the baseline

[[Page 42095]]

for evaluating the changes and impacts of the three ``action'' 
alternatives.
    Alternative B emphasizes the development and extensive use of 
outreach and partnerships to assist the national monument staff in 
telling the Minidoka story to the American people. Off-site visitor 
education and interpretation would be conducted through diverse 
comprehensive programs developed in cooperation with partners, 
including school districts, museums, and educational and legacy 
organizations and institutions. Alternative B would focus on 
identifying off-site facilities for education and interpretation with 
minimal new development at the national monument site. Historic 
structures within the national monument would be adaptively reused for 
visitor and monument functions and for minimal administrative and 
operational needs. Key historic features would be delineated, restored, 
or rehabilitated. On-site education and interpretation would be 
accomplished through a range of self-exploratory visitor experiences.
    Alternative C, the ``agency preferred'' alternative, emphasizes on-
site education and interpretation and the extensive treatment and use 
of cultural resources in telling the Minidoka story. On-site education 
and interpretation would be accomplished through a wide range of 
visitor experiences, including immersion into the historic scene, 
interaction with a variety of educational and interpretive media and 
personal services, and participation in creative and self-directed 
activities. Off-site visitor education and interpretation would be 
conducted through diverse programs developed in cooperation with 
partners, including school districts, museums, and educational and 
legacy organizations and institutions. Various preservation techniques 
would be used to protect and enhance historic resources, such as 
delineation, stabilization, restoration, rehabilitation, and 
reconstruction. These historic resources would be used for interpretive 
purposes to accurately and authentically convey the history and 
significance of the national monument. The establishment of one 
complete residential block in its original location and configuration 
would be the cornerstone of interpretive services and facilities at the 
national monument, essential for understanding and appreciation of the 
incarceration experience and the significance of the national monument. 
A visitor contact facility and maintenance area would be developed at 
the national monument by adaptively reusing existing historic 
buildings. There would be minimal new development.
    The preferred alternative would require congressional legislation 
to authorize a boundary expansion to include areas where barracks 
historically stood in order to reestablish a complete residential 
block. Additionally, the NPS would request congressional legislation to 
transfer the Minidoka Relocation Center landfill, located one mile 
north of the national monument, from the BLM to the NPS. Finally, 
changing the name to Minidoka National Historic Site would be 
recommended, to be more reflective of the site's historic value.
    Alternative D proposes several actions that would focus on 
education and interpretation on-site, specifically through the 
development of new visitor facilities. The 9-acre property would be 
used to develop new facilities and to provide space for a new national 
monument visitor center, education and research functions, along with a 
new memorial and garden. On-site education and interpretation would be 
accomplished through a wide range of visitor experiences, including 
interaction with a variety of educational and interpretive media, 
participation in creative and self-guided activities, and limited 
access of the historic scene. Visitor education programs, adaptive 
reuse of historic structures for park use, and the establishment of 
formal partnerships for education and outreach purposes would 
complement the new construction. Alternative D would focus on sound 
cultural resource management through preservation, restoration, 
rehabilitation, and reconstruction of certain historic features. 
Several actions would provide for the protection and enhancement of 
natural and scenic resources. Other actions would establish 
administrative and operational capabilities in terms of facilities and 
staffing. Most national monument staff activities would be on-site to 
manage resources and provide for visitor understanding and appreciation 
of the national monument. However, some off-site educational programs 
would complement the on-site programs through partnerships.
    Public Review and Comment: The Draft GMP/EIS is now available for 
public review. Interested persons and organizations wishing to express 
any new concerns or provide additional information are encouraged to 
obtain the document by contacting the Superintendent, Minidoka 
Internment National Monument, P.O. Box 570, Hagerman, Idaho 83332-0570, 
or via telephone at (208) 837-4793. The draft document may also be 
reviewed at area libraries, or can be obtained electronically via the 
monument's planning Web site at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/miin. In 
addition, the NPS will conduct public meetings in Idaho, Washington, 
and Oregon to facilitate public review and comment on the Draft GMP/
EIS. At this time, meetings are intended to be scheduled during the 
first two weeks of July, 2005. Confirmed details on meeting locations, 
times, etc will be announced via local and regional news media, will be 
posted on the monument's planning Web site, or can be obtained by 
contacting the Superintendent directly. A draft GMP/EIS newsletter will 
also be distributed widely.
    All written comments must be postmarked or transmitted not later 
than September 19, 2005, and should be submitted to the address noted 
above (or may also be submitted by e-mail to MIIN--GMP@nps.gov). All 
comments will become part of the public record. If individuals 
submitting comments request that their name or address be withheld from 
public disclosure, the request will be honored to the extent allowable 
by law. Such requests must be stated prominently in the beginning of 
the comments. There also may be circumstances wherein the NPS will 
withhold a respondent's identity as allowable by law. As always: the 
NPS will make available to public inspection all submissions from 
organizations or businesses and from persons identifying themselves as 
representatives or officials of organizations; and anonymous comments 
may not be considered.
    Decision: Following the opportunity to review the DEIS/GMP, all 
comments received will be carefully considered in preparing the final 
document. This is anticipated to be completed during fall 2006, and its 
availability will be similarly announced in the Federal Register and 
via local and regional press media. As a delegated EIS, the official 
responsible for the final decision is the Regional Director, Pacific 
West Region; subsequently the official responsible for implementation 
would be the Superintendent, Minidoka Internment National Monument.

    Dated: April 15, 2005.
Patricia L. Neubacher,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 05-14354 Filed 7-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-DC-P